Objectives(1) To describe existing tools to assess the burden of informal caregivers of people with cancer, (2) to describe how these tools have been validated and (3) to describe the areas of interest of existing assessment tool entries.BackgroundThe caregiver burden of informal caregivers of people with cancer greatly affects their lives. There is a wide variety of relevant assessment tools available, but there are no studies to help researchers to select tools.MethodsA search was conducted using the keywords 'cancer', 'caregiver', 'burden' and 'scale' in Medline (PubMed), CINAHL and EMBASE to include articles that developed or applied tools to assess the burden on informal caregivers of cancer patients. Once eligible tools were identified, we searched their 'primary reference' studies. If the original scale was assessed in a population other than informal caregivers of cancer patients, we again searched for psychometric measures in the population of caregivers of cancer patients.ResultsThis study retrieved 938 articles on developing or applying the informal caregiver burden instrument for cancer patients, including 42 scales. Internal consistency of the original scales ranged from 0.53 to 0.96. Nineteen scales initially developed to assess caregiver burden for patients with dementia, stroke and other disorders were later used for caregivers of cancer patients, eight of which have not yet been validated. Reclassifying all scale domains of concern revealed that scale assessments focused more on caregivers' physical health, emotional state and caregiving tasks.ConclusionThis review identifies many scales for assessing informal caregiver burden in cancer patients and gives scales recommended. However, a portion still needs to be validated. The development of a new scale proposes to be based on a theoretical framework and to consider dimensions for assessing support resources.ImpactWhat problem did the study address?: This paper collates assessment tools on the burden of informal carers of people with cancer. It also provides information on the applicable population, reliability and validity. What were the main findings?: 41 scales could be considered for use, eight of which have not been validated. The scales focus more on assessing caregivers' physical health, emotional state and caregiving tasks, and less on the dimension of support resources. Where and on whom will the research have an impact?: There are implications for informal carers of cancer patients in hospitals or in the community, as well as for relevant researchers.ImpactWhat problem did the study address?: This paper collates assessment tools on the burden of informal carers of people with cancer. It also provides information on the applicable population, reliability and validity. What were the main findings?: 41 scales could be considered for use, eight of which have not been validated. The scales focus more on assessing caregivers' physical health, emotional state and caregiving tasks, and less on the dimension of support resources. Where and on whom will the research have an impact?: There are implications for informal carers of cancer patients in hospitals or in the community, as well as for relevant researchers.ImpactWhat problem did the study address?: This paper collates assessment tools on the burden of informal carers of people with cancer. It also provides information on the applicable population, reliability and validity. What were the main findings?: 41 scales could be considered for use, eight of which have not been validated. The scales focus more on assessing caregivers' physical health, emotional state and caregiving tasks, and less on the dimension of support resources. Where and on whom will the research have an impact?: There are implications for informal carers of cancer patients in hospitals or in the community, as well as for relevant researchers.Reporting MethodRetrieved with reference to systematic evaluation.Patient or Public ContributionNo patient or public contribution.
